He Knows If You've Been Sleeping...
Concerned that our Commando in Chief's penchant for peeping and eavesdropping may have put him in violation of the law, putting his Presidency at risk?
Don't be!
He's assured us that he's innocent and we all know that guilty criminals NEVER make false claims to innocence!
If you're an evil America-hating terrorist-abetting traitor for whom our beloved President's word, alone, isn't good enough, don't get your panties in a knot, just yet! (Don't worry, there'll be plenty of time for that, after you settle in at Gitmo!) Unless you're Satan, Himself, you'll be relieved to learn that Attorney General Alberto Gonzales has backed the President's claims of innocence with definitive proof, in legal precedence, that George W. Christ is still a man without sin!
You see, in 2004, Sandra Day O'Connor wrote a plurality opinion, on the law in question, (the "Authorization to Use Military Force" passed by Congress and signed into law by Lord W. Bush a week after the 9/11 attacks) clarifying that while the word "detention" does not appear in the law, the authorization of military force implies authorization to detain enemy soldiers, without regard to citizenship, who might be captured on the battlefield. So, by not saying he can't spy on Americans at whim, this law clearly gives Bush and his adminionstration permission to ignore the 1978 Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA.)
If you're not familiar with the FISA, it was signed into law as something of a bone-throw to Americans who, for some reason, were outraged over Nixon's domestic spying on Peace and Civil Rights activists (whose anti-American activities, it should be noted, resulted in major changes to the course of this nation, many of which remain, to this day, despite the ongoing effort to restore this nation to her former glory.) This act basically just laid down a bunch of bothersome red tape by establishing procedures whereby the governement would have to jump through hoops -- investigating, submitting applications and showing just cause -- to obtain permission from a secret 11 member court for covert surveillance and searches of citizens and foreigners suspected of espionage or terrorism.
Note: It is currently unclear why the Bush adminionstration wasted precious time submitting nearly 1800 applications to this secret court, in 2004, when this law had already cleared the way for them to proceed unchecked. Someone -- probably a liberal infiltrator in the party, or a minor(ity) neo-con player who hasn't much of a future ahead of him, anyway -- may have some explaining to do and time to serve on that point, later... when the time for finger-pointing and blame-placing comes.
To prevent a lot of unnecessary whining and complaining about violations of our so-called "rights," each of us should bear in mind all of the other things The Authorization To Use Military Force does not specifically preclude the government from doing to us in its effort to stamp out terrorism. If you love your country, you will trust them implicity and without even the slightest hint of question. Failure to do so only blows your cover and reveals you as the terrorist operative in Lucifer's employ, that you so obviously are.
For example, if you should find yourself being dragged from your home into the street, stripped naked, bound and doused in gasoline as someone in a U.S. military uniform, holding a box of farmer matches, orders a U.S. military chaplain to ask God to spare you from the flames if you are not a terrorist -- The Authorization To Use Military Force does NOT specifically mention the torching of random citizens. They're well within the law and merely doing what's necessary to protect you and your fellow countrymen from terrorist threats.
...And, as the match is being struck, instead of begging for mercy and struggling to break free, you should remain calm, secure in the knowledge that you have nothing to fear if you are innocent!
Tuesday, December 20, 2005
Monday, December 19, 2005
Tap Dancing
By now, you've surely heard the latest "talking point." Cheney has said it, Bush has repeated it and, while I've successfully avoided their echo chamber, today, I'm sure Murdoch has taught it to all of his mimicking minions, by now. The wording varies slightly, from parrot to parrot but the gist of this latest talking point is: "We could have prevented the terrorist attacks of 9/11, if we'd had the wire tapping provisions of the Patriot Act."
Huh? You and I know that for their latest talking point to be true and their assessment correct, they would have had to know the following, in advance of the attacks:
Clearly, this knowledge, alone, would not have prevented the attacks. In that, they are truthful and correct. Further investigation and surveillance would, indeed, have been required to get the more specific information necessary to foil the terrorists' plot, in time.
But, without this foreknowledge, the extra latitude given them in the Patriot Act wouldn't have done them a whole lot of good because they wouldn't have known which phones to tap or which phone calls merited close attention of the thousands upon thousands of U.S. phones that make & receive foreign calls, each and every day.
It's a no-brainer that we don't have the manpower to dedicate one person's ears to each individual call coming into or going out of the U.S. Surely, they don't expect us to believe that the terrorists would have waited around while we played "terrorist in the landline & cellular haystack" listening to random calls, hoping to happen upon the ONE call out of countless thousands that might alert us to the planning of a possible attack!
So, let's assume that this latest talking point isn't just smoke being blown up our collective noses and that they did have those bits of information that would have made wire tapping a valuable tool in stopping those attacks. That knowledge would have given them enough "just cause" to open up the broader investigative latitude necessary for them to prevent the attacks, using the pre-Patriot Act methods that were already available to them at the time and which, by the way, included provisions for wire-tapping and various other forms of surveillance.
So, as you hear this talking point repeated, over and over and over again, in the next few days, ask yourself the question the press should be asking them:
If they knew enough for wire tapping to have prevented the attacks, why on Earth didn't they employ any (and every!) of the methods they had available to them, at the time, to prevent them?
Huh? You and I know that for their latest talking point to be true and their assessment correct, they would have had to know the following, in advance of the attacks:
- That the attacks were being planned
- The identity of at least one specific operative involved in the planning of the attacks.
- Approximate, if not specific, locations for each of these known operatives
Clearly, this knowledge, alone, would not have prevented the attacks. In that, they are truthful and correct. Further investigation and surveillance would, indeed, have been required to get the more specific information necessary to foil the terrorists' plot, in time.
But, without this foreknowledge, the extra latitude given them in the Patriot Act wouldn't have done them a whole lot of good because they wouldn't have known which phones to tap or which phone calls merited close attention of the thousands upon thousands of U.S. phones that make & receive foreign calls, each and every day.
It's a no-brainer that we don't have the manpower to dedicate one person's ears to each individual call coming into or going out of the U.S. Surely, they don't expect us to believe that the terrorists would have waited around while we played "terrorist in the landline & cellular haystack" listening to random calls, hoping to happen upon the ONE call out of countless thousands that might alert us to the planning of a possible attack!
So, let's assume that this latest talking point isn't just smoke being blown up our collective noses and that they did have those bits of information that would have made wire tapping a valuable tool in stopping those attacks. That knowledge would have given them enough "just cause" to open up the broader investigative latitude necessary for them to prevent the attacks, using the pre-Patriot Act methods that were already available to them at the time and which, by the way, included provisions for wire-tapping and various other forms of surveillance.
So, as you hear this talking point repeated, over and over and over again, in the next few days, ask yourself the question the press should be asking them:
If they knew enough for wire tapping to have prevented the attacks, why on Earth didn't they employ any (and every!) of the methods they had available to them, at the time, to prevent them?
Sunday, December 18, 2005
Grandma Makes Her Living As A Stripper (Parody)
This posting is dedicated to my Aunt Rosetta, who always appreciated a good bawdy laugh, never stayed on her own side of the generation gap, always dressed to the nines and performed with a burlesque troupe (including a faux-striptease routine)in her 70's and 80s. Sadly, Aunt Rosetta passed away, just a few days ago, at the tender age of 94. She had been too ill to share this with, since I wrote it, last year, but she would have gotten a huge kick out of it. I hope you enjoy it as much as she would have. Please Note: This one's for grown-ups, only.
Grandma Makes Her Living As a Stripper
By Melhi
(to the tune of Grandma Got Run Over By a Reindeer)
(CHORUS)
Grandma makes her living as a stripper,
She's a featured act, a "specialty"
Grandma still gets paid to show her ta-tas,
(At least her knockers hide her knobby knees!)
She's been strippin' now for eons
And she puts on quite a show
A geriatric fascination
When she toddles on the stage and hangs 'em low
When you see her, heed this warning
Find a seat that's toward the back,
She's been known to knock some eyes out
It's incredible when Grandma swings her rack.
(CHORUS)
No one works a crowd like Grandma,
You should hear the patrons yell
Sure they're yellin' "Put your clothes on!"
But they're cheerin' when she does...and tipping well!
That's not all there is to Grandma,
You should see her from the back
She can get her cheeks a-twirlin'
Cuz they hang down to her heels like gunny sacks!
(Gunny sacks!)
(repeat CHORUS)
When she's dancing on your table
You can book a private gig, (Ahhhh!)
You can grab yourself a handful
Just be careful not to snap her like a twig
She's done lots of special favors,
And according to her "friends"
My old Granny's pretty spry yet...
For a gal who dated Abe and wears Depends!
(repeat CHORUS)
(Swing 'em Grandma!!)
(repeat CHORUS)
Grandma Makes Her Living As a Stripper
By Melhi
(to the tune of Grandma Got Run Over By a Reindeer)
(CHORUS)
Grandma makes her living as a stripper,
She's a featured act, a "specialty"
Grandma still gets paid to show her ta-tas,
(At least her knockers hide her knobby knees!)
She's been strippin' now for eons
And she puts on quite a show
A geriatric fascination
When she toddles on the stage and hangs 'em low
When you see her, heed this warning
Find a seat that's toward the back,
She's been known to knock some eyes out
It's incredible when Grandma swings her rack.
(CHORUS)
No one works a crowd like Grandma,
You should hear the patrons yell
Sure they're yellin' "Put your clothes on!"
But they're cheerin' when she does...and tipping well!
That's not all there is to Grandma,
You should see her from the back
She can get her cheeks a-twirlin'
Cuz they hang down to her heels like gunny sacks!
(Gunny sacks!)
(repeat CHORUS)
When she's dancing on your table
You can book a private gig, (Ahhhh!)
You can grab yourself a handful
Just be careful not to snap her like a twig
She's done lots of special favors,
And according to her "friends"
My old Granny's pretty spry yet...
For a gal who dated Abe and wears Depends!
(repeat CHORUS)
(Swing 'em Grandma!!)
(repeat CHORUS)
Tuesday, December 13, 2005
Another Secular Salvo In The War On Christmas
I love Christmas. You may doubt that before the end of this blog entry, but I really do! It's my second favorite holiday of the year. (If you're curious, Hallowe'en is my very favorite.)
My Christmas is just that... MY Christmas. It doesn't necessarily share much more than a name and date with your Christmas. The nativity story is just another holiday story to me, like "The Littlest Fir Tree" or "Twas The Night Before Christmas." Shepherds, mangers, wise men, etc.? Just another holiday decoration theme. Family, friends, good memories and good times... these are the reasons for my season. These are the things I celebrate.
I didn't pull my Christmas out of thin air and I don't celebrate my Christmas in my way as any sort of affront to or assault on anyone else's Christmas. My Christmas isn't affected by and has no effect on anyone else's Christmas.
My Christmas is a wholly secular tradition, passed down through multiple generations of my family. It evolves, over time, as each generation adds or changes a little something and my Christmas, as it exists today, comes complete with all the secular trimmings and trappings in all their gaudy secular splendor: Santa, elves, peppermints, holly, mistletoe, tinsel, twinkle lights, lawn decorations, fir trees with tacky crap dangling from every branch, lots of presents, over-spending, family gatherings, feasting, cheesy songs, more feasting, ugly holiday garb, egg nog, claymation specials on T.V., etc... I didn't create any of these trimmings or trappings and they're hardly new on the Christmas scene. As with previous generations of my family, I work with what's readily and abundantly available.
As I've gone about preparing for and participating in my holiday, each year, it really hasn't entered my mind, much less bothered me, that Christmas isn't the same holiday for everyone that it is for me or that others might ascribe beliefs to it that I do not necessarily share or attach to this particular day.
Apparantly, though, among the Christmas celebrants whose holiday differs greatly from mine, there are some who are deeply disturbed by the very existence of my Christmas. These are people who would like to force me to celebrate their holiday in their way or just revoke my right to celebrate Christmas, at all. They've twisted their hatred of me, my differing beliefs, my Christmas and my secular holiday traditons into a spooky campfire tale of evil Christmas-snatching liberals preying on all that is sacred to the righteous!
Lately, they've plastered their fantastic story all over the news. According to the reports, by celebrating my secular holiday in my secular way, I am joining with others of my ilk to obliterate their Christmas and replace it with a secular celebration of debauchery! Even my wishing someone "Happy Holly Daze," (which is MY traditional greeting) is a scud-missle strike at the very heart of all that is Christmas.
These accusations have come as a complete shock to me. When I put a plastic Santa on my lawn, I'm not trying to force my neighbors to take the plastic manger scene off of their lawn. When I wish someone a "Happy Holly Daze," there is no sinister intent behind my greeting. I'm not trying to strip their sacred holiday of the name assigned to it when their forebears stole it, stamped their messiah all over it and began pimping it out to the unconverted masses like a cheap tinsel-strewn whore luring lascivious heathens to her Christian houses of worship. I'm just being nice and spreading my holiday cheer... or, more accurately, the cheer of MY holiday.
If you're among those who are offended by my fond wishes for your seasonal joy, by all means, feel free to teach me a lesson by having a miserable holiday season, instead! It's no skin off my back how you choose to react to my pleasantries. I don't know what "counts" in your Christmas, but in MY Christmas, it's the thought that counts -- and the thought behind my greeting is one of good will.
Most curiously, a select few of the people who've been spinning these fantastic tales of a fierce war waged on the helpless holy majority by the all-powerful unholy few have further expressed a belief that, to be saved from ourselves, our society needs to return to the fine, old, sacred traditions of Christmas. After giving it a great deal of serious thought, I have to admit that I'm inclined to agree with them. A forced society-wide return to the old ways, especially if brought about by the most outspoken of the righteous, would, indeed, put an end to all of these irrational, biggotted concerns about the imaginary effects of my secular Christmas on anyone else's sacred Christmas. But then, I'm bearing in mind what those fine, old, sacred traditions actually were!
Soooo.... instead of my usual seaonal greeting, I'll help end this imaginary war and get the traditional Christmas ball rolling by extending all of you a most heartfelt and joyous: Io! Saturnalia! (Cast off your toga!)
My Christmas is just that... MY Christmas. It doesn't necessarily share much more than a name and date with your Christmas. The nativity story is just another holiday story to me, like "The Littlest Fir Tree" or "Twas The Night Before Christmas." Shepherds, mangers, wise men, etc.? Just another holiday decoration theme. Family, friends, good memories and good times... these are the reasons for my season. These are the things I celebrate.
I didn't pull my Christmas out of thin air and I don't celebrate my Christmas in my way as any sort of affront to or assault on anyone else's Christmas. My Christmas isn't affected by and has no effect on anyone else's Christmas.
My Christmas is a wholly secular tradition, passed down through multiple generations of my family. It evolves, over time, as each generation adds or changes a little something and my Christmas, as it exists today, comes complete with all the secular trimmings and trappings in all their gaudy secular splendor: Santa, elves, peppermints, holly, mistletoe, tinsel, twinkle lights, lawn decorations, fir trees with tacky crap dangling from every branch, lots of presents, over-spending, family gatherings, feasting, cheesy songs, more feasting, ugly holiday garb, egg nog, claymation specials on T.V., etc... I didn't create any of these trimmings or trappings and they're hardly new on the Christmas scene. As with previous generations of my family, I work with what's readily and abundantly available.
As I've gone about preparing for and participating in my holiday, each year, it really hasn't entered my mind, much less bothered me, that Christmas isn't the same holiday for everyone that it is for me or that others might ascribe beliefs to it that I do not necessarily share or attach to this particular day.
Apparantly, though, among the Christmas celebrants whose holiday differs greatly from mine, there are some who are deeply disturbed by the very existence of my Christmas. These are people who would like to force me to celebrate their holiday in their way or just revoke my right to celebrate Christmas, at all. They've twisted their hatred of me, my differing beliefs, my Christmas and my secular holiday traditons into a spooky campfire tale of evil Christmas-snatching liberals preying on all that is sacred to the righteous!
Lately, they've plastered their fantastic story all over the news. According to the reports, by celebrating my secular holiday in my secular way, I am joining with others of my ilk to obliterate their Christmas and replace it with a secular celebration of debauchery! Even my wishing someone "Happy Holly Daze," (which is MY traditional greeting) is a scud-missle strike at the very heart of all that is Christmas.
These accusations have come as a complete shock to me. When I put a plastic Santa on my lawn, I'm not trying to force my neighbors to take the plastic manger scene off of their lawn. When I wish someone a "Happy Holly Daze," there is no sinister intent behind my greeting. I'm not trying to strip their sacred holiday of the name assigned to it when their forebears stole it, stamped their messiah all over it and began pimping it out to the unconverted masses like a cheap tinsel-strewn whore luring lascivious heathens to her Christian houses of worship. I'm just being nice and spreading my holiday cheer... or, more accurately, the cheer of MY holiday.
If you're among those who are offended by my fond wishes for your seasonal joy, by all means, feel free to teach me a lesson by having a miserable holiday season, instead! It's no skin off my back how you choose to react to my pleasantries. I don't know what "counts" in your Christmas, but in MY Christmas, it's the thought that counts -- and the thought behind my greeting is one of good will.
Most curiously, a select few of the people who've been spinning these fantastic tales of a fierce war waged on the helpless holy majority by the all-powerful unholy few have further expressed a belief that, to be saved from ourselves, our society needs to return to the fine, old, sacred traditions of Christmas. After giving it a great deal of serious thought, I have to admit that I'm inclined to agree with them. A forced society-wide return to the old ways, especially if brought about by the most outspoken of the righteous, would, indeed, put an end to all of these irrational, biggotted concerns about the imaginary effects of my secular Christmas on anyone else's sacred Christmas. But then, I'm bearing in mind what those fine, old, sacred traditions actually were!
Soooo.... instead of my usual seaonal greeting, I'll help end this imaginary war and get the traditional Christmas ball rolling by extending all of you a most heartfelt and joyous: Io! Saturnalia! (Cast off your toga!)
Sunday, December 04, 2005
Twelve Terms of Office (parody)
As I was reading about yet another powerful politician going down in flames (Republican Mayor West of Spokane, this time,) I was inspired to write a new parody from the P.O.V. of a fictional politician, plagued by scandal. Enjoy!
Twelve Terms of Office
(To the tune of Twelve Days of Christmas)
by Melhi
It's my first term in office, the press is dogging me
Had a fling with my secre-tar-y
It's my second term in office, they're crucifying me
Two sets of books
And a fling with my secre-tar-y
It's my third term in office, they've got the goods on me
Three spent shells
Two sets of books
And a fling with my secre-tar-y
It's my fourth term in office, they're still lambasting me
4 D.U.I.s
Three spent shells
Two sets of books
And a fling with my secre-tar-y
It's my fifth term in office, why won't they let me be?
Five bas-tard kids!
Four D.U.I.s
Three spent shells
Two sets of books
And a fling with my secre-tar-y
It's my sixth term in office, they're out to ruin me
Sex tape is streaming
Five bas-tard kids!
Four D.U.I.s
Three spent shells
Two sets of books
And a fling with my secre-tar-y
It's my seventh term in office, the press is killing me
Seven grams of "candy"
Sex tape is streaming
Five bas-tard kids!
Four D.U.I.s
Three spent shells
Two sets of books
And a fling with my secre-tar-y
It's my eighth term in office, they're out to butcher me
Ate baby seal meat
Seven grams of "candy"
Sex tape is streaming
Five bas-tard kids!
Four D.U.I.s
Three spent shells
Two sets of books
And a fling with my secre-tar-y
It's my ninth term in office and still they're plaguing me
Nine no bid contracts
Ate baby seal meat
Seven grams of "candy"
Sex tape is streaming
Five bas-tard kids!
Four D.U.I.s
Three spent shells
Two sets of books
And a fling with my secre-tar-y
It's my tenth term in office and they're destroying me,
Ten month vacation
Nine no-bid contracts
Ate baby seal meat
Seven grams of "candy"
Sex tape is streaming
Five bas-tard kids!
Four D.U.I.s
Three spent shells
Two sets of books
And a fling with my secre-tar-y
It's my eleventh term in office, they won't let up on me
Election tally rigging
Ten month vacations
Nine no-bid contracts
Ate baby seal meat
Seven grams of "candy"
Sex tape is streaming
Five bas-tard kids!
Four D.U.I.s
Three spent shells
Two sets of books
And a fling with my secre-tar-y
They're singing my praises in loving memory...
Twelve terms of office
Election tally rigging
Ten month vacations
Nine no-bid contracts
Ate baby seal meat
Seven grams of "candy"
Sex tape is streaming
Five bas-tard kids!
Four D.U.I.s
Three spent shells
Two sets of books
And a fling with my secre-tar-y
Twelve Terms of Office
(To the tune of Twelve Days of Christmas)
by Melhi
It's my first term in office, the press is dogging me
Had a fling with my secre-tar-y
It's my second term in office, they're crucifying me
Two sets of books
And a fling with my secre-tar-y
It's my third term in office, they've got the goods on me
Three spent shells
Two sets of books
And a fling with my secre-tar-y
It's my fourth term in office, they're still lambasting me
4 D.U.I.s
Three spent shells
Two sets of books
And a fling with my secre-tar-y
It's my fifth term in office, why won't they let me be?
Five bas-tard kids!
Four D.U.I.s
Three spent shells
Two sets of books
And a fling with my secre-tar-y
It's my sixth term in office, they're out to ruin me
Sex tape is streaming
Five bas-tard kids!
Four D.U.I.s
Three spent shells
Two sets of books
And a fling with my secre-tar-y
It's my seventh term in office, the press is killing me
Seven grams of "candy"
Sex tape is streaming
Five bas-tard kids!
Four D.U.I.s
Three spent shells
Two sets of books
And a fling with my secre-tar-y
It's my eighth term in office, they're out to butcher me
Ate baby seal meat
Seven grams of "candy"
Sex tape is streaming
Five bas-tard kids!
Four D.U.I.s
Three spent shells
Two sets of books
And a fling with my secre-tar-y
It's my ninth term in office and still they're plaguing me
Nine no bid contracts
Ate baby seal meat
Seven grams of "candy"
Sex tape is streaming
Five bas-tard kids!
Four D.U.I.s
Three spent shells
Two sets of books
And a fling with my secre-tar-y
It's my tenth term in office and they're destroying me,
Ten month vacation
Nine no-bid contracts
Ate baby seal meat
Seven grams of "candy"
Sex tape is streaming
Five bas-tard kids!
Four D.U.I.s
Three spent shells
Two sets of books
And a fling with my secre-tar-y
It's my eleventh term in office, they won't let up on me
Election tally rigging
Ten month vacations
Nine no-bid contracts
Ate baby seal meat
Seven grams of "candy"
Sex tape is streaming
Five bas-tard kids!
Four D.U.I.s
Three spent shells
Two sets of books
And a fling with my secre-tar-y
They're singing my praises in loving memory...
Twelve terms of office
Election tally rigging
Ten month vacations
Nine no-bid contracts
Ate baby seal meat
Seven grams of "candy"
Sex tape is streaming
Five bas-tard kids!
Four D.U.I.s
Three spent shells
Two sets of books
And a fling with my secre-tar-y
Friday, December 02, 2005
Political Peas In a Pod?
I'm sure you've heard it said that Democrats and Republicans are the same. Perhaps you are among those who believe it. More and more people are saying it, every day. In fact, it's becoming quite the catch-phrase of the main stream. But is it true? Let's compare and contrast a little, shall we?
Budget:
Democrat: Tax and Spend
Republican: Spend and Spend and Spend... and Tax
Patriotism:
Democrat: Love it or do something to improve it.
Republican: Love it or leave it.
Taxes:
Democrat: "Take from the rich to give to the poor." Wealthy pay a higher percentage of net taxable income than the working class, but placing the tax burden on the wealthy is fair because the wealthy still pay a much lower percentage of their disposable (gross income less their cost of living expenses) income.
Republican: "Take from the working class to give to the rich." The working (or middle) class pays a much higher percentage of both gross income and disposable income than the wealthy, but it's fair because the middle class pays the same percentage of net taxable income.
Heath Care:
Democrats: Access to health care is a basic human right.
Republicans: Access to health care is an earned privelege.
Welfare:
Democrats: When the basic survival needs (clothes, food, shelter, health care) of our poorest citizens are provided for, it benefits all of society and shows the world that we are a wealthy and powerful nation. Welfare can be a hand up for people who have fallen on hard times and just need a boost. It should be retooled or overhauled so that it is less easily abused and does not trap multiple generations of families in poverty and reliance on the state for sustenance.
Republicans: When the basic survival needs (clothes, food, shelter, health care) of our poorest citizens are provided for, it creates a drain on all of society and shows the world that we are a weak nation. Welfare is just a hand out for people who are too lazy to support themselves. It should be eliminated.
Labor:
Democrats: Labor unions ensure that the working class is compensated for the time, knowledge and skills they market to employers. A good labor force contributes, substantially, to the financial success of a business. The captain steers the ship with the aid of an able crew.
Republicans: Labor unions are communist organizations whose goal is the even redistribution, among the workers, of the profits earned by businesses through the marketing of goods and services to consumers. Profits are the result of good management, the workforce, by itself, has little or no effect on the financial success of a business. The captain steers the ship and leads the crew, without him there would be no ship.
For Our Own Good:
Democrat: To reduce teen pregnancy and STD rates, sex ed should include information about abstinence in addition to information about birth control and STD prevention.
Republican: To reduce teen pregancy and STD rates, sex ed should include information about abstinence, alone, because it is the only guaranteed method of birth control and STD prevention.
Democrat: Protect us from big business by regulating business ethics.
Republican: Protect us from ourselves by regulating our morals.
Separation of Church & State:
Democrats: Separation of church and state refers to all faiths, because there is no such thing as a generic, one size fits all faith.
Republicans: Separation of church and state refers to all but non-denominational protestantism, which suffices as an acceptable generic, one size fits all faith because the over-all Christian body of faith is the majority faith in the US.
Fictional examples:
A Democrat who wants a forest to exist for his/her great-grandchildren to enjoy will work to protect it, legally, as a national treasure, to ensure that it exists for our families to enjoy for many generations to come.
A Republican who wants a forest to exist for his/her great-grandchildren to enjoy will purchase the land and put it in a centuries long trust to ensure that it will exist for his/her family to enjoy for many generations to come.
A Democrat catches a twenty dollar bill he sees falling from a hole in the pocket of a shabbily dressed man and immediately returns it to the man, firmly believing that a man so shabbily attired cannot afford to lose such a large amount of money.
A Republican catches a twenty dollar bill he sees falling from a hole in the pocket of a shabbily dressed man and pockets it, himself, firmly believing that if the man had any appreciation for such a large amount of money, he could afford less shabby attire and would e more careful than to carry his money around in a pocket with a hole in it.
Now that I read back through the comparisons, I can see why some people think that Democrats and Republicans are the same. Both spend our money. Both want us to love our country. Both regulate on our behalf. Both tax us and believe their tax plans to be fair. Neither is pushing for our public schools to teach little Baptist children to worship Vishnu. Both want all of us who deserve it to have access to decent health care. Both want to prevent teen pregnancy and STDs through education. Both think our nation is judged by how we treat our poorest citizens. Both want to see the people who are responsible for the success of a business compensated, fairly, for their efforts. The fictional forest would be preserved for future generations either way and neither the Democrat nor the Republican would let that imaginary twenty dollar bill blow away with the breeze.
But... alike? I might just as easily say that all the snowflakes resting on my lawn this fine December afternoon are alike: they're all white, they're all made of frozen water, they all have six points, they're all fragile and they all fell from above. Only upon closer examination is it revealed to me that each individual snowflake is unique. The differences are in the details.
Budget:
Democrat: Tax and Spend
Republican: Spend and Spend and Spend... and Tax
Patriotism:
Democrat: Love it or do something to improve it.
Republican: Love it or leave it.
Taxes:
Democrat: "Take from the rich to give to the poor." Wealthy pay a higher percentage of net taxable income than the working class, but placing the tax burden on the wealthy is fair because the wealthy still pay a much lower percentage of their disposable (gross income less their cost of living expenses) income.
Republican: "Take from the working class to give to the rich." The working (or middle) class pays a much higher percentage of both gross income and disposable income than the wealthy, but it's fair because the middle class pays the same percentage of net taxable income.
Heath Care:
Democrats: Access to health care is a basic human right.
Republicans: Access to health care is an earned privelege.
Welfare:
Democrats: When the basic survival needs (clothes, food, shelter, health care) of our poorest citizens are provided for, it benefits all of society and shows the world that we are a wealthy and powerful nation. Welfare can be a hand up for people who have fallen on hard times and just need a boost. It should be retooled or overhauled so that it is less easily abused and does not trap multiple generations of families in poverty and reliance on the state for sustenance.
Republicans: When the basic survival needs (clothes, food, shelter, health care) of our poorest citizens are provided for, it creates a drain on all of society and shows the world that we are a weak nation. Welfare is just a hand out for people who are too lazy to support themselves. It should be eliminated.
Labor:
Democrats: Labor unions ensure that the working class is compensated for the time, knowledge and skills they market to employers. A good labor force contributes, substantially, to the financial success of a business. The captain steers the ship with the aid of an able crew.
Republicans: Labor unions are communist organizations whose goal is the even redistribution, among the workers, of the profits earned by businesses through the marketing of goods and services to consumers. Profits are the result of good management, the workforce, by itself, has little or no effect on the financial success of a business. The captain steers the ship and leads the crew, without him there would be no ship.
For Our Own Good:
Democrat: To reduce teen pregnancy and STD rates, sex ed should include information about abstinence in addition to information about birth control and STD prevention.
Republican: To reduce teen pregancy and STD rates, sex ed should include information about abstinence, alone, because it is the only guaranteed method of birth control and STD prevention.
Democrat: Protect us from big business by regulating business ethics.
Republican: Protect us from ourselves by regulating our morals.
Separation of Church & State:
Democrats: Separation of church and state refers to all faiths, because there is no such thing as a generic, one size fits all faith.
Republicans: Separation of church and state refers to all but non-denominational protestantism, which suffices as an acceptable generic, one size fits all faith because the over-all Christian body of faith is the majority faith in the US.
Fictional examples:
A Democrat who wants a forest to exist for his/her great-grandchildren to enjoy will work to protect it, legally, as a national treasure, to ensure that it exists for our families to enjoy for many generations to come.
A Republican who wants a forest to exist for his/her great-grandchildren to enjoy will purchase the land and put it in a centuries long trust to ensure that it will exist for his/her family to enjoy for many generations to come.
A Democrat catches a twenty dollar bill he sees falling from a hole in the pocket of a shabbily dressed man and immediately returns it to the man, firmly believing that a man so shabbily attired cannot afford to lose such a large amount of money.
A Republican catches a twenty dollar bill he sees falling from a hole in the pocket of a shabbily dressed man and pockets it, himself, firmly believing that if the man had any appreciation for such a large amount of money, he could afford less shabby attire and would e more careful than to carry his money around in a pocket with a hole in it.
Now that I read back through the comparisons, I can see why some people think that Democrats and Republicans are the same. Both spend our money. Both want us to love our country. Both regulate on our behalf. Both tax us and believe their tax plans to be fair. Neither is pushing for our public schools to teach little Baptist children to worship Vishnu. Both want all of us who deserve it to have access to decent health care. Both want to prevent teen pregnancy and STDs through education. Both think our nation is judged by how we treat our poorest citizens. Both want to see the people who are responsible for the success of a business compensated, fairly, for their efforts. The fictional forest would be preserved for future generations either way and neither the Democrat nor the Republican would let that imaginary twenty dollar bill blow away with the breeze.
But... alike? I might just as easily say that all the snowflakes resting on my lawn this fine December afternoon are alike: they're all white, they're all made of frozen water, they all have six points, they're all fragile and they all fell from above. Only upon closer examination is it revealed to me that each individual snowflake is unique. The differences are in the details.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)